May 3, 2016 at 6:53 am
Had a "discussion" today. Developer asked I push a couple stored procedures. No problem, this happens all the time. Looked at the SP's and saw they did not have the comment section I have requested (management approved) for all SP's. Now a submitted SP can have a minimal amount of info and I will let it go, however this guy only had his name. No description of what they did or what ran them. I suggested he add information and he gets upset. When he went for a smoke, two other developers said I did a good job of it.
I hope the guy gets over it as we sit back to back and is a friend. :unsure:
Oh, well.
May 3, 2016 at 7:04 am
The developer needs to get over it. It's a reasonable request and will take him five minutes to do.
May 3, 2016 at 7:15 am
jeff.mason (5/3/2016)
The developer needs to get over it. It's a reasonable request and will take him five minutes to do.
Less if using a template, or more if he's not sure of what he's doing.
May 3, 2016 at 7:23 am
djj (5/3/2016)
Had a "discussion" today. Developer asked I push a couple stored procedures. No problem, this happens all the time. Looked at the SP's and saw they did not have the comment section I have requested (management approved) for all SP's. Now a submitted SP can have a minimal amount of info and I will let it go, however this guy only had his name. No description of what they did or what ran them. I suggested he add information and he gets upset. When he went for a smoke, two other developers said I did a good job of it.I hope the guy gets over it as we sit back to back and is a friend. :unsure:
Oh, well.
Not only does the "developer" need to get over it, as suggested, he needs to concentrate a bit more on following the standards you laid out and have management approval on. It's actually a part of his job now and he needs to be a team member by doing his job correctly... first time if possible.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 3, 2016 at 7:39 am
Jeff Moden (5/3/2016)
djj (5/3/2016)
Had a "discussion" today. Developer asked I push a couple stored procedures. No problem, this happens all the time. Looked at the SP's and saw they did not have the comment section I have requested (management approved) for all SP's. Now a submitted SP can have a minimal amount of info and I will let it go, however this guy only had his name. No description of what they did or what ran them. I suggested he add information and he gets upset. When he went for a smoke, two other developers said I did a good job of it.I hope the guy gets over it as we sit back to back and is a friend. :unsure:
Oh, well.
Not only does the "developer" need to get over it, as suggested, he needs to concentrate a bit more on following the standards you laid out and have management approval on. It's actually a part of his job now and he needs to be a team member by doing his job correctly... first time if possible.
Love your work, Jeff.
If you haven't even tried to resolve your issue, please don't expect the hard-working volunteers here to waste their time providing links to answers which you could easily have found yourself.
May 3, 2016 at 8:30 am
Phil Parkin (5/3/2016)
Jeff Moden (5/3/2016)
djj (5/3/2016)
Had a "discussion" today. Developer asked I push a couple stored procedures. No problem, this happens all the time. Looked at the SP's and saw they did not have the comment section I have requested (management approved) for all SP's. Now a submitted SP can have a minimal amount of info and I will let it go, however this guy only had his name. No description of what they did or what ran them. I suggested he add information and he gets upset. When he went for a smoke, two other developers said I did a good job of it.I hope the guy gets over it as we sit back to back and is a friend. :unsure:
Oh, well.
Not only does the "developer" need to get over it, as suggested, he needs to concentrate a bit more on following the standards you laid out and have management approval on. It's actually a part of his job now and he needs to be a team member by doing his job correctly... first time if possible.
Love your work, Jeff.
>>>>>Pork>>>>Pork>>>>Pork>>>>Chop Chop Chop >>>> \o/
😎
May 3, 2016 at 9:23 am
Jeff Moden (5/3/2016)
djj (5/3/2016)
Had a "discussion" today. Developer asked I push a couple stored procedures. No problem, this happens all the time. Looked at the SP's and saw they did not have the comment section I have requested (management approved) for all SP's. Now a submitted SP can have a minimal amount of info and I will let it go, however this guy only had his name. No description of what they did or what ran them. I suggested he add information and he gets upset. When he went for a smoke, two other developers said I did a good job of it.I hope the guy gets over it as we sit back to back and is a friend. :unsure:
Oh, well.
Not only does the "developer" need to get over it, as suggested, he needs to concentrate a bit more on following the standards you laid out and have management approval on. It's actually a part of his job now and he needs to be a team member by doing his job correctly... first time if possible.
Needs to get over himself, too... Standards like this are there for a reason, and the reason is that writing and supporting stuff like this is a *team* effort, not a one-man job.
And, even if it were a one-man job, then the documentation had better be up to date, in case that man gets badly concussed by a flying frozen pork chop...
What's that line about "always document your code as if it's going to be maintained by an axe-wielding psychopath who knows where you live"? That.
Thomas Rushton
blog: https://thelonedba.wordpress.com
May 3, 2016 at 9:43 am
ThomasRushton (5/3/2016)
Jeff Moden (5/3/2016)
djj (5/3/2016)
Had a "discussion" today. Developer asked I push a couple stored procedures. No problem, this happens all the time. Looked at the SP's and saw they did not have the comment section I have requested (management approved) for all SP's. Now a submitted SP can have a minimal amount of info and I will let it go, however this guy only had his name. No description of what they did or what ran them. I suggested he add information and he gets upset. When he went for a smoke, two other developers said I did a good job of it.I hope the guy gets over it as we sit back to back and is a friend. :unsure:
Oh, well.
Not only does the "developer" need to get over it, as suggested, he needs to concentrate a bit more on following the standards you laid out and have management approval on. It's actually a part of his job now and he needs to be a team member by doing his job correctly... first time if possible.
Needs to get over himself, too... Standards like this are there for a reason, and the reason is that writing and supporting stuff like this is a *team* effort, not a one-man job.
And, even if it were a one-man job, then the documentation had better be up to date, in case that man gets badly concussed by a flying frozen pork chop...
What's that line about "always document your code as if it's going to be maintained by an axe-wielding psychopath who knows where you live"? That.
:hehe::laugh::-D
May 3, 2016 at 10:00 am
djj (5/3/2016)
ThomasRushton (5/3/2016)
Jeff Moden (5/3/2016)
djj (5/3/2016)
Had a "discussion" today. Developer asked I push a couple stored procedures. No problem, this happens all the time. Looked at the SP's and saw they did not have the comment section I have requested (management approved) for all SP's. Now a submitted SP can have a minimal amount of info and I will let it go, however this guy only had his name. No description of what they did or what ran them. I suggested he add information and he gets upset. When he went for a smoke, two other developers said I did a good job of it.I hope the guy gets over it as we sit back to back and is a friend. :unsure:
Oh, well.
Not only does the "developer" need to get over it, as suggested, he needs to concentrate a bit more on following the standards you laid out and have management approval on. It's actually a part of his job now and he needs to be a team member by doing his job correctly... first time if possible.
Needs to get over himself, too... Standards like this are there for a reason, and the reason is that writing and supporting stuff like this is a *team* effort, not a one-man job.
And, even if it were a one-man job, then the documentation had better be up to date, in case that man gets badly concussed by a flying frozen pork chop...
What's that line about "always document your code as if it's going to be maintained by an axe-wielding psychopath who knows where you live"? That.
:hehe::laugh::-D
He should not only understand what his job is, but also what your job is and respect that. Standards exist for a reason and are everyone's responsibility. Sounds to me like you handled it very well.
May 3, 2016 at 10:19 am
Some people should not be allowed any where near a database server.
May 3, 2016 at 10:22 am
Lynn Pettis (5/3/2016)
Some people should not be allowed any where near a database server.
+1000
May 3, 2016 at 10:23 am
Lynn Pettis (5/3/2016)
Some people should not be allowed any where near a database server.
But, but...that's my job. :hehe:
May 3, 2016 at 10:25 am
Lynn Pettis (5/3/2016)
Lynn Pettis (5/3/2016)
Some people should not be allowed any where near a database server.+1000
I guess I'll agree with your agreement with yourself. 😛
May 3, 2016 at 10:29 am
Ed Wagner (5/3/2016)
Lynn Pettis (5/3/2016)
Lynn Pettis (5/3/2016)
Some people should not be allowed any where near a database server.+1000
I guess I'll agree with your agreement with yourself. 😛
Is this about the system dbs thread?
May 3, 2016 at 10:30 am
Luis Cazares (5/3/2016)
Ed Wagner (5/3/2016)
Lynn Pettis (5/3/2016)
Lynn Pettis (5/3/2016)
Some people should not be allowed any where near a database server.+1000
I guess I'll agree with your agreement with yourself. 😛
Is this about the system dbs thread?
I should have stayed away!
This is down right scary!
Viewing 15 posts - 53,896 through 53,910 (of 66,549 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply